Lefties, liberals, guilt and murder

First topic message reminder :

In the wake of this migrants crisis the West needs to look at itself and judge it's behaviour.

we are all selfish deep down, and when the looking Glass is held up to us,some of us can't handle what we see, some of us hate what we see and have to compensate.

Because let's face it, it's not compassion you liberals see when you look into those black pits you call eyes, it's guilt.

That all consuming famous white western privileged guilt, and the desperate urge to ease it that most of you liberal parasites can't do without yet hate so much.

Hows does that work anyway??

What's a slice of guilt free peace go for these days??

5 minutes for a tenner??

A week in exchange for an annual subscription to save the earth children donkey monkey charity society or some other money making scam?? I bet the pressure on you liberals to appear on the social scene as being great humanitarians is high indeed.

The guilt induced panic gripping Europe is certainly sky high, the highest since WWII don't you know??  

why i imagine its almost compulsory fashion these days to have some bauble, some accessory to prove how much you care?? Perhaps a Syrian baby to carry  around in your handbag like a Paris Hilton toy dog??

Perhaps not a Syrian for the fashion conscious, i hear Iraqi children are next months fashion, so the good news is you can be a really good Internet humanitarian and probably get a couple of Syrians for half the price if you wait till next month and keep your guilt at bay for that little bit longer

Or better yet Perhaps like ole Bobby boy you liberals  could offer up your house and heart for some immigrants??

Or if you're really very very rich, and very very very white and therefore very very very very guilty your HOUSES and a flat for a few families,though i daresay at the cheap price of only 4 families, bob will be back to feeling guilty in no time at all.

I suggest you take a 100 families in

after all its Europe - always open and never full, come on in bring your friends, like our guilt, we have no upper limit to our moral obligation to immigrants.

Best vet them though first eh, wouldn't want some child beheading , woman raping gay killing lunatic Jihadists living with you now would you.

Of course not that's Madness!! We don't want THOSE kind of immigrants

But of course you may have to be a little racist and xenophobic if you vet them, but only a little bit.............

On second thoughts best not run the risk of being called racist, after all statistically speaking you're more likely to be abducted by an alien pirate ship driven by Elvis than you are to be killed by a terrorist.

So realistically the chances are that the 100 families busy roasting a freshly halal slaughtered goat round a campfire in your lounge have nothing but good intentions and multicultural enrichment to offer you.

Christie wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:


That is because Victor is the best at simplifying context and does it with great wit, which is a winning combination.

But on saying that, I have to admit that Quill did make a couple of outstanding posts on another thread the other day, that really stood out to me and was head and shoulders above everyone else.  And I'm not just saying that because he has just suddenly appeared on this thread again

He does that occasionally, can you remember which thread it was on?

Like reading Katie Hopkins vs Christopher Hitchens, sass? Hahaha x

Eilzel wrote:Like reading Katie Hopkins vs Christopher Hitchens, sass? Hahaha x

Exactly, spot on Les x

All I want is that when these terrorists "get one through, is for all these lefty liberalists to stand up and admit their complicity in whatever atrocity happens, and they WILL be complicit!.

then for them to be releived of all and any assets, in order to compensate the inevitable casualties....

THAT is "only fair"

od course we know that wont happen, they will be left to continue to peddle their collective angst on everyones part, in the mean while those who suffer from such an act will get sod all, and indeed will then be attacked by the R/W as scroungers and layabouts" when they are disabled and or traumatised....


what will we hear from the lefty lieral to those thus affected....well it wont be shouted out...they are too cowardly for that.....it will be whispered and "leaked"  "tough" it will say we have to think of "them" not you "selfish lot"  you can go begging on the council tip.......you can loose your home and be moved into "social" housing and charged the "bedroom tax" etc etc etc ...YOU are "no longer worthy"

WE dont care about YOU...only "THEM"

Eilzel wrote:Like reading Katie Hopkins vs Christopher Hitchens, sass? Hahaha x

Smelly in drag, now that would be an eye opener, or should I say shelly?





Best point of the day though Eilzel, just about summed up the vast level in difference between them in intellect.

Haha, cheers didge

sassy wrote:

Christie wrote:

But on saying that, I have to admit that Quill did make a couple of outstanding posts on another thread the other day, that really stood out to me and was head and shoulders above everyone else.  And I'm not just saying that because he has just suddenly appeared on this thread again

He does that occasionally, can you remember which thread it was on?

I sure can. This one here.
http://www.newsfixboard.com/t11354-more-than-11000-icelanders-offer-to-house-syrian-refugees-to-help-european-crisis

victorismyhero wrote:All I want is that when these terrorists "get one through, is for all these lefty liberalists to stand up and admit their complicity in whatever atrocity happens, and they WILL be complicit!.

then for them to be releived of all and any assets, in order to compensate the inevitable casualties....

THAT is "only fair"

od course we know that wont happen, they will be left to continue to peddle their collective angst on everyones part, in the mean while those who suffer from such an act will get sod all, and indeed will then be attacked by the R/W as scroungers and layabouts" when they are disabled and or traumatised....


what will we hear from the lefty lieral to those thus affected....well it wont be shouted out...they are too cowardly for that.....it will be whispered and "leaked"  "tough" it will say we have to think of "them" not you "selfish lot"  you can go begging on the council tip.......you can loose your home and be moved into "social" housing and charged the "bedroom tax" etc etc etc ...YOU are "no longer worthy"

WE dont care about YOU...only "THEM"

Why?
Do you stand up when a man murders a woman and that you have not said men should not be allowed in this country?
Where is your reasoning based oin fear?
Men?
Cultures?
Nationalities?
Its about weighing up the pressing need and if you deny hundreds of thousands through the fear of a handful, how is that helping anyone?
So you condemned hundreds oif thousands in order to save a few lives.
Now you tell me, was that worth it?

Victor wrote:All I want is that when these terrorists "get one through, is for all these lefty liberalists to stand up and admit their complicity in whatever atrocity happens, and they WILL be complicit!.

then for them to be releived of all and any assets, in order to compensate the inevitable casualties....

THAT is "only fair"

Do you mean GWB and Cheney? That's the last real atrocity.

Christie wrote:

sassy wrote:

He does that occasionally, can you remember which thread it was on?

I sure can. This one here.
http://www.newsfixboard.com/t11354-more-than-11000-icelanders-offer-to-house-syrian-refugees-to-help-european-crisis

Thanks, will read back.

victorismyhero wrote:All I want is that when these terrorists "get one through, is for all these lefty liberalists to stand up and admit their complicity in whatever atrocity happens, and they WILL be complicit!.

then for them to be releived of all and any assets, in order to compensate the inevitable casualties....

THAT is "only fair"

od course we know that wont happen, they will be left to continue to peddle their collective angst on everyones part, in the mean while those who suffer from such an act will get sod all, and indeed will then be attacked by the R/W as scroungers and layabouts" when they are disabled and or traumatised....


what will we hear from the lefty lieral to those thus affected....well it wont be shouted out...they are too cowardly for that.....it will be whispered and "leaked"  "tough" it will say we have to think of "them" not you "selfish lot"  you can go begging on the council tip.......you can loose your home and be moved into "social" housing and charged the "bedroom tax" etc etc etc ...YOU are "no longer worthy"

WE dont care about YOU...only "THEM"

Right, so I presume by that standard Victor, when tomorrow, and the day after, and the day after that, children die in refugee camps, or children still in Syria are blown up by barrel bombs, and you really don't want to see the pictures of them literally splattered all over the walls, what walls are left, people on the RW who have been trying to stop the refugees will be complicit and will stand over their bodies and mourn.  No?  Well perhaps in probably the most appalling situation that this world has faced for a very long time, people are trying to do what they think is right, and balance the good and the bad of the situation and help as many as possible.

Christie wrote:I'm in agreement with Eddie. Smelly Bandits style of writing is very easy to read. In a long ramble like his, I normally only read the first paragraph or so, then bored. But his style gripped me from the start and interested me enough to want to read to the very end. When I compare it to Quills post, no offence to Quill, but his was too posh for me to read on, if that makes sense? I prefer plain speaking. Yes I am aware that makes me sound a thicko lol

l


That's exactly it.
Feelings in a post not just written text.

I can only quote the "anti everything brigade"


if it saves one life its worth it,,,,,(talking about OUR people)



besides that wasnt the point....


the point is about responisibility

if terrorists get in via this route and cause an atrocity...then the lefty liberali alliance is COMPLICIT...simples....

what then will YOU say to the nam who is crippled for life, loses his job, his home and his "raison d'etre"

will you say aww poor you and do fuck all?
will you say toughen up you idle slacker....and do fuck all
will you put YOUR hand in YOUR pocket and support him (and his family) as you seem to think we should all do for these refugees?
will YOU be there throwing rocks at the govt in order to get decent compensation ...as opposed to the pitiful and derisory "criminal injuries compensation"???

will YOU MAKE SURE this "victim" (of YOUR policies) destroyed at age 25, get the 1 to 2 million pounds he will need to make some sort of "normal" life...

some how I doubt it...you will claim such an amount is unrealistic and not right...let me tell you its minimal....

so whats the answer to that....

sassy wrote:

victorismyhero wrote:All I want is that when these terrorists "get one through, is for all these lefty liberalists to stand up and admit their complicity in whatever atrocity happens, and they WILL be complicit!.

then for them to be releived of all and any assets, in order to compensate the inevitable casualties....

THAT is "only fair"

od course we know that wont happen, they will be left to continue to peddle their collective angst on everyones part, in the mean while those who suffer from such an act will get sod all, and indeed will then be attacked by the R/W as scroungers and layabouts" when they are disabled and or traumatised....


what will we hear from the lefty lieral to those thus affected....well it wont be shouted out...they are too cowardly for that.....it will be whispered and "leaked"  "tough" it will say we have to think of "them" not you "selfish lot"  you can go begging on the council tip.......you can loose your home and be moved into "social" housing and charged the "bedroom tax" etc etc etc ...YOU are "no longer worthy"

WE dont care about YOU...only "THEM"

Right, so I presume by that standard Victor, when tomorrow, and the day after, and the day after that, children die in refugee camps, or children still in Syria are blown up by barrel bombs, and you really don't want to see the pictures of them literally splattered all over the walls, what walls are left, people on the RW who have been trying to stop the refugees will be complicit and will stand over their bodies and mourn.  No?  Well perhaps in probably the most appalling situation that this world has faced for a very long time, people are trying to do what they think is right, and balance the good and the bad of the situation and help as many as possible.

and whenn te above happens sassy...what will you tell the 25 year old crippled for life?

tough ?

you deserve it for being an englishman?

erm.....injuries ,,,what injuries ...I see no injuries ?

YOU dont coiunt...only "THEM"?

as I have intimated before ...you lefties are soft in the head.

100's of 1000' of syrians......and all of em doctors

Eilzel wrote:To be honest Eds I think you have a bias of your own (we all do of course but I sometimes feel you think you are somehow less so). Of course we are all a little bit selfish, but SB asserts a lot which is obviously based on his (and those who share his view) own outlook.

Because smelly and perhaps yourself have these feelings of tribal interest in a stronger way than say me or Quill, you cannot possibly bring yourself to think we seriously have the greater ability to seriously consider social justice and shared commn interests (of humanity) over tribal instincts- not without presuming we are somehow guilty.

I tell you now I feel no guilt for my ancestors or my governments. I simply care. And recognize the role we played and continue to play in the world and our subsequent responsibilities as a wealthy, involved nation. But because you see the world differently you think me (or others like me) are anti-white/British etc- which if you actually thought about it pretty ridiculous.

Your bias stops you believing Quill, didge and myself can 'really' think the way we do. We may be selfish at times, all are, but unlike some (ie: SB) that does not mean we aren't more strongly inclined to care about humanity in a broader sense.

You say you have an open mind Eds, yet on this it seems awfully closed.

No les I just see that most things in life have two sides, sometimes at different times but often at the same time.

I find myself swinging between both sides - I actually can't help it.

I can come away from a thread of opposing views and think "I don't know how I feel now....as I agree with both sides"

At the end of the day, on this topic, and I've said it from the start, I'd never ever turn those refugees away from help.
Not ever.

As a country, even if it were true and we were wholly and completely overcrowded (which I, sure we are not but we will be one day, in the extreme), I'd still not be able to turn those people away.

But we are all selfish at heart, for ourselves and the ones we love.

victorismyhero wrote:I can only quote the "anti everything brigade"


if it saves one life its worth it,,,,,(talking about OUR people)



besides that wasnt the point....


the point is about responisibility

if terrorists get in via this route and cause an atrocity...then the lefty liberali alliance is COMPLICIT...simples....

what then will YOU say to the nam who is crippled for life, loses his job, his home and his "raison d'etre"

will you say aww poor you and do fuck all?
will you say toughen up you idle slacker....and do fuck all
will you put YOUR hand in YOUR pocket and support him (and his family) as you seem to think we should all do for these refugees?
will YOU be there throwing rocks at the govt in order to get decent compensation ...as opposed to the pitiful and derisory "criminal injuries compensation"???

will YOU MAKE SURE this "victim" (of YOUR policies) destroyed at age 25, get the 1 to 2 million pounds he will need to make some sort of "normal" life...

some how I doubt it...you will claim such an amount is unrealistic and not right...let me tell you its minimal....

so whats the answer to that....

False argument

You do not want terrorists being let in
The reason so nobody dies
So if the cause is to deny terrorists killing then your reason is about saving life.
So it is an absurd reason based again on geography.
You want some people to be safe based on the land they were born into.
So is your reason to save lives?
Yes it is
Now unless you want to stop all tourism, all immigration both in and out of this country, then your argument is false again, because within these situations a terrorist can gain entry to the country and commit an act of terror.
Sorry absurd Victor on every level.
The reasoning here is the more pressing why.
Do we take in thousands of people in need who lives are in danger and accept the fact this may lead to some terrorists gaining entry, (where they could easily do so via tourism or immigration) or do we allow thousands to suffer and die all because you want to feel safe and secure which is never going to be a reality until we combat issues around the world?

Original Quill wrote:

You are, and I'm glad you are, as we are all annoying and interesting in equal measures on this forum IMO

I like your posts, but sometimes I think they lack feeling and real opinion from you; I'd rather read you, not your written essay on your given subject.

^Eds

But if you are so open minded why do you refuse to believe people like me, Quill and didge actually care about humanity in a broader sense over our selfishness (not saying we are without selfishness)? Why do you presume anti-white/British racism on us just because we don't think as you do?

I feel as though I have to give a shout out to the women, now that I just bigged up 3 men lol its only fair. Sassy and Eddie, you two also speak your mind and say it how it is with ease and fluent understanding!

Also, why do you assume Quill doesn't give his real opinions or feelings just because doesn't type a certain way? Some people a good writers, others are not. That doesn't qualify or disqualify their view as eithet honest or intelligent.

Victor, in all situations you have to make a decision and weigh up the balances.  Do you let a child go to school by himself when he is old enough and suffer the guilt if he runs across the road and is hurt etc etc.  In this case, you have the life of millions, literally millions of refugees, many of them children, and if you don't do something they will suffer the most appalling atrocities.  Against that, you have to weigh up that it might let someone in who commits an atrocity here.  Now, to me, every single person has the same worth, every life is worth as much.  The risk on one side is small and might never happen.  On the other is certainty that thousands of atrocities will be committed.  Not maybe, not might, but will.  So I make my choice.

Cuchulain wrote:

victorismyhero wrote:I can only quote the "anti everything brigade"


if it saves one life its worth it,,,,,(talking about OUR people)



besides that wasnt the point....


the point is about responisibility

if terrorists get in via this route and cause an atrocity...then the lefty liberali alliance is COMPLICIT...simples....

what then will YOU say to the nam who is crippled for life, loses his job, his home and his "raison d'etre"

will you say aww poor you and do fuck all?
will you say toughen up you idle slacker....and do fuck all
will you put YOUR hand in YOUR pocket and support him (and his family) as you seem to think we should all do for these refugees?
will YOU be there throwing rocks at the govt in order to get decent compensation ...as opposed to the pitiful and derisory "criminal injuries compensation"???

will YOU MAKE SURE this "victim" (of YOUR policies) destroyed at age 25, get the 1 to 2 million pounds he will need to make some sort of "normal" life...

some how I doubt it...you will claim such an amount is unrealistic and not right...let me tell you its minimal....

so whats the answer to that....

False argument

You do not want terrorists being let in
The reason so nobody dies
So if the cause is to deny terrorists killing then your reason is about saving life.
So it is an absurd reason based again on geography.
You want some people to be safe based on the land they were born into.
So is your reason to save lives?
Yes it is
Now unless you want to stop all tourism, all immigration both in and out of this country, then your argument is false again, because within these situations a terrorist can gain entry to the country and commit an act of terror.
Sorry absurd Victor on every level.
The reasoning here is the more pressing why.
Do we take in thousands of people in need who lives are in danger and accept the fact this may lead to some terrorists gaining entry, (where they could easily do so via tourism or immigration) or do we allow thousands to suffer and die all because you want to feel safe and secure which is never going to be a reality until we combat issues around the world?

So,,what you are saying is that YOU would tell that 25 year old victim...hard luck ...you deserve fuck all?
you are being absurd
yor injuries are merely a figment of your "fear"
you are "absurd"

????????????????

eddie wrote:

Eilzel wrote:To be honest Eds I think you have a bias of your own (we all do of course but I sometimes feel you think you are somehow less so). Of course we are all a little bit selfish, but SB asserts a lot which is obviously based on his (and those who share his view) own outlook.

Because smelly and perhaps yourself have these feelings of tribal interest in a stronger way than say me or Quill, you cannot possibly bring yourself to think we seriously have the greater ability to seriously consider social justice and shared commn interests (of humanity) over tribal instincts- not without presuming we are somehow guilty.

I tell you now I feel no guilt for my ancestors or my governments. I simply care. And recognize the role we played and continue to play in the world and our subsequent responsibilities as a wealthy, involved nation. But because you see the world differently you think me (or others like me) are anti-white/British etc- which if you actually thought about it pretty ridiculous.

Your bias stops you believing Quill, didge and myself can 'really' think the way we do. We may be selfish at times, all are, but unlike some (ie: SB) that does not mean we aren't more strongly inclined to care about humanity in a broader sense.

You say you have an open mind Eds, yet on this it seems awfully closed.

No les I just see that most things in life have two sides, sometimes at different times but often at the same time.

I find myself swinging between both sides - I actually can't help it.

I can come away from a thread of opposing views and think "I don't know how I feel now....as I agree with both sides"

At the end of the day, on this topic, and I've said it from the start, I'd never ever turn those refugees away from help.
Not ever.

As a country, even if it were true and we were wholly and completely overcrowded (which I, sure we are not but we will be one day, in the extreme), I'd still not be able to turn those people away.

But we are all selfish at heart, for ourselves and the ones we love.

That fails to factor how people place their needs
And how they place other needs often above themselves.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Yes we all have different levels of selfish, but you are taking selfish as one level, when it is far removed from that. We can look at basica selfishnesss, are need to eat, where even then I have given up much lunch to someone who is hungry. Though the selfish inner me, knows i have enough to buy more. So it is not completely a selfless act, but you start to see the poing in how selfishness can be defined by levels.

Eilzel, Quill myself and others want and better world for all and that starts out looking towards the needs of others over ourselves

sassy wrote:In all situations you have to make a decisions and weigh up the balances.  Do you let a child go to school by himself when he is old enough and suffer the guilt if he runs across the road and is hurt etc etc.  In this case, you have the life of millions, literally millions of refugees, many of them children, and if you don't do something they will suffer the most appalling atrocities.  Against that, you have to weigh up that it might let someone in who commits an atrocity here.  Now, to me, every single person has the same worth, every life is worth as much.  The risk on one side is small and might never happen.  On the other is certainty that thousands of atrocities will be committed.  Not maybe, not might, but will.  So I make my choice.

another one dodging te question and reasoning the wrong question
another "politicians" answer

what will YOU say to that victim when he says "WHY?"

I actually think I know.....


I think you will run and hide....

you would make that victim the agressor for asking and consider yourself the victim for being asked.....

Christie wrote:I feel as though I have to give a shout out to the women, now that I just bigged up 3 men lol  its only fair.  Sassy and Eddie, you two also speak your mind and say it how it is with ease and fluent understanding!

And so do you Christie, in fact I have been enjoying your style of using facts against bigotry, more and more.  And unlike me, you don't seem to want to bat them round the head with a blunt object lol

Cuchulain wrote:

eddie wrote:

No les I just see that most things in life have two sides, sometimes at different times but often at the same time.

I find myself swinging between both sides - I actually can't help it.

I can come away from a thread of opposing views and think "I don't know how I feel now....as I agree with both sides"

At the end of the day, on this topic, and I've said it from the start, I'd never ever turn those refugees away from help.
Not ever.

As a country, even if it were true and we were wholly and completely overcrowded (which I, sure we are not but we will be one day, in the extreme), I'd still not be able to turn those people away.

But we are all selfish at heart, for ourselves and the ones we love.

That fails to factor how people place their needs
And how they place other needs often above themselves.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Yes we all have different levels of selfish, but you are taking selfish as one level, when it is far removed from that. We can look at basica selfishnesss, are need to eat, where even then I have given up much lunch to someone who is hungry. Though the selfish inner me, knows i have enough to buy more. So it is not completely a selfless act, but you start to see the poing in how selfishness can be defined by levels.

Eilzel, Quill myself and others want and better world for all and that starts out looking towards the needs of others over ourselves

the greeks did that a few millenia ago...look where it got them.....

victorismyhero wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:



False argument

You do not want terrorists being let in
The reason so nobody dies
So if the cause is to deny terrorists killing then your reason is about saving life.
So it is an absurd reason based again on geography.
You want some people to be safe based on the land they were born into.
So is your reason to save lives?
Yes it is
Now unless you want to stop all tourism, all immigration both in and out of this country, then your argument is false again, because within these situations a terrorist can gain entry to the country and commit an act of terror.
Sorry absurd Victor on every level.
The reasoning here is the more pressing why.
Do we take in thousands of people in need who lives are in danger and accept the fact this may lead to some terrorists gaining entry, (where they could easily do so via tourism or immigration) or do we allow thousands to suffer and die all because you want to feel safe and secure which is never going to be a reality until we combat issues around the world?

So,,what you are saying is that YOU would tell that 25 year old victim...hard luck ...you deserve fuck all?
you are being absurd
yor injuries are merely a figment of your "fear"
you are "absurd"

????????????????

You forget my family have been victims to terrorism.
Everyone including the victim reuires support
Just like we did when we lost family
Your views are fueled by fear for your safety and not that of other, sbecause we all take the risk daily that anything can happen to us. Today somebody could have been run over, do you say to people not to leave their homes incase they maybe run over? No because we combat and overcome fear which we have to live with daily/ How many just find it difficult to board a plane for example. What you do is play off fear in the worst form possible and yet never apply this to other aspects of life which you are far more proable to be a victim to.

That is why your whole reasoning is absurd

victorismyhero wrote:

sassy wrote:In all situations you have to make a decisions and weigh up the balances.  Do you let a child go to school by himself when he is old enough and suffer the guilt if he runs across the road and is hurt etc etc.  In this case, you have the life of millions, literally millions of refugees, many of them children, and if you don't do something they will suffer the most appalling atrocities.  Against that, you have to weigh up that it might let someone in who commits an atrocity here.  Now, to me, every single person has the same worth, every life is worth as much.  The risk on one side is small and might never happen.  On the other is certainty that thousands of atrocities will be committed.  Not maybe, not might, but will.  So I make my choice.

another one dodging te question and reasoning the wrong question
another "politicians" answer

what will YOU say to that victim when he says "WHY?"

I actually think I know.....


I think you will run and hide....

you would make that victim the agressor for asking and consider yourself the victim for being asked.....

I'm not dodging anything, it's not my style.  There is no 'right' answer.  There is no answer that will mean no-one will get hurt, no-one will suffer.  Therefore I weigh up the facts and decide which one will cause the least to suffer.  And then you have to step up to the mark and live with the consequences.

Eilzel wrote:To be honest Eds I think you have a bias of your own (we all do of course but I sometimes feel you think you are somehow less so). Of course we are all a little bit selfish, but SB asserts a lot which is obviously based on his (and those who share his view) own outlook.

Because smelly and perhaps yourself have these feelings of tribal interest in a stronger way than say me or Quill, you cannot possibly bring yourself to think we seriously have the greater ability to seriously consider social justice and shared commn interests (of humanity) over tribal instincts- not without presuming we are somehow guilty.

I tell you now I feel no guilt for my ancestors or my governments. I simply care. And recognize the role we played and continue to play in the world and our subsequent responsibilities as a wealthy, involved nation. But because you see the world differently you think me (or others like me) are anti-white/British etc- which if you actually thought about it pretty ridiculous.

Your bias stops you believing Quill, didge and myself can 'really' think the way we do. We may be selfish at times, all are, but unlike some (ie: SB) that does not mean we aren't more strongly inclined to care about humanity in a broader sense.

You say you have an open mind Eds, yet on this it seems awfully closed.

like i said

all i do is hold the mirror, the rest belongs to you.

the guilt you feel is unconscious, hammered into you by white guilt liberals follwoing their apologist adgenda

you automatically have to feel guilty when faced with any kind of misfortune or tragedy that involves a minority, because society tells us as whites we share a collective responsiblity for the legacy of slavery that we still have to pay back for

who is it that constantly pumps foreign aid?? the RW??? no sirree

its the liberals, because you feel guilty over the myth that the white man has enslaved the ethnic people of the world stolen all their resources since the dawn of time. unfortunately this strategy is flawed in logic since it perpetuates the problem by removing perosnal and collective responsiblity from said ethnics, to the point where their incentive to improve their lot in life and advance their own countries is utterly eroded.

in the UK the same strategy has resulted in multiple generations within famlilies living on the dole because they have no reason or incentive to improve, indeed it is more beneficail for them to maintain the status quo, we have simply exported that internationally and done far greater to the ethnic collective than our slavery or plundering ever could have.

as a result ethnics continue to remain in a state of compassionate subjegation, forced on them by liberals who view them as victims and therefore in nedd of help and aid - a more insidious kind of racism is hard to come by

this racist pity borne of guilt translates into everyday society and the very fact that mainstream society open identifies some people as "ethnic minorites" - a liberal PC term, proves that society seems them as seperate, the fact that these minorities groups receive special treatment, in terms of employment and protection under law once again reinforces their collective victim status

a status forced on them by white guilt liberals

Eilzel wrote:^Eds

But if you are so open minded why do you refuse to believe people like me, Quill and didge actually care about humanity in a broader sense over our selfishness (not saying we are without selfishness)? Why do you presume anti-white/British racism on us just because we don't think as you do?

I think quill is possibly worse than you and didge, and that's not a bad thing but it's a tiresome thing.

I think you all care about humanity as long as it's the underdog of humanity.
Perhaps you swing too far the other way and have forgotten about the underdog at home on your own doorstep?

It's almost like you can't say, okay there are needy people, let's help some but not at the expense of people who live in this country.

You can still care and be a little bit "okay that's enough"

How much caring is too much? Or not enough? Is your amount more harmful than mine? Less so?

People are thinking of themselves and their own survival.
The media has done a spiffing job at sensationalizing the reports on the refugees.
Not many people now are falling for it they don't want them here because they're struggling to survive themselves, they don't want to see anyone die or suffer but in this world we are living for our own families and their welfare .
It's just so wrong to put a guilt trip on our people when they can barley survive themselves and with unemployment , no housing, benefit cuts , nhs waiting lists people can just now see how much worse this is going to be for them/us.

People waiting for homes on social housing lists are jealous of immigrants jumping the queue and rightly so , if you have been waiting five + years and then some immigrant family jump you in the queue then that is not just unfair it is a cause for feeling very jealous and can only cause animosity amongst immigrants and British born people .

It's not so bad for pensioners as they are receiving a regular income, but most families are struggling to make ends meet and at the end of the week there is nothing left for little luxuries and why can't working families have luxuries for their hard work. How do you think it makes a family feel when their main wage earner is paying tax and NIC only to have immigrants come in and get everything on a plate and how do you think it makes them feel having to wait for nhs treatment having paid into the system .

British people are not heartless they help anyone in need just look at the charities they give to such as children in need the money raised from that is huge so you see by this that even the poor will give to help those less fortunate, but they also know that times are so hard right now and common sense tells them that we just need to look after our own for a change.

The thing is as I am pointing out people do not apply the same fear process they do to many parts of their lives.
They take the easy option of blame all the time and do not look for solutions. Its easier to blame that it is to find a better way forward, so people take the negative view often then the positive route maybe far harder but is way more rewarding.

sassy wrote:

Christie wrote:I feel as though I have to give a shout out to the women, now that I just bigged up 3 men lol  its only fair.  Sassy and Eddie, you two also speak your mind and say it how it is with ease and fluent understanding!

And so do you Christie, in fact I have been enjoying your style of using facts against bigotry, more and more.  And unlike me, you don't seem to want to bat them round the head with a blunt object lol

There may come a time Sassy, I have been very close to it a couple of times with some And thanks too!

eddie wrote:

Eilzel wrote:^Eds

But if you are so open minded why do you refuse to believe people like me, Quill and didge actually care about humanity in a broader sense over our selfishness (not saying we are without selfishness)? Why do you presume anti-white/British racism on us just because we don't think as you do?

I think quill is possibly worse than you and didge, and that's not a bad thing but it's a tiresome thing.

I think you all care about humanity as long as it's the underdog of humanity.
Perhaps you swing too far the other way and have forgotten about the underdog at home on your own doorstep?

It's almost like you can't say, okay there are needy people, let's help some but not at the expense of people who live in this country.

You can still care and be a little bit "okay that's enough"

How much caring is too much? Or not enough? Is your amount more harmful than mine? Less so?

On that I think you are completely and utterly wrong.  People who fight for justice, fight for it for everyone, everywhere, including here.  Who will be standing up for the unions in this country so that the workers are not trodden on?  People like me.  Because it doesn't matter where the fight for justice is, it has to be fought, for those at home and abroad.

sassy wrote:

victorismyhero wrote:

another one dodging te question and reasoning the wrong question
another "politicians" answer

what will YOU say to that victim when he says "WHY?"

I actually think I know.....


I think you will run and hide....

you would make that victim the agressor for asking and consider yourself the victim for being asked.....

I'm not dodging anything, it's not my style.  There is no 'right' answer.  There is no answer that will mean no-one will get hurt, no-one will suffer.  Therefore I weigh up the facts and decide which one will cause the least to suffer.  And then you have to step up to the mark and live with the consequences.

politicians answer....


what will YOU say to that victim????

will YOU go throw rocks at downing street to get him...and the others the 1-2 million they will need? or will you just chuck him on the scrap heap of "benefits" (with ALL that that entails)

you are in fact running away right now by "justifying your position"

Christie wrote:

sassy wrote:

And so do you Christie, in fact I have been enjoying your style of using facts against bigotry, more and more.  And unlike me, you don't seem to want to bat them round the head with a blunt object lol

There may come a time Sassy, I have been very close to it a couple of times with some  And thanks too!

I'll lend you my cast iron frying pan lol

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

what the shit are you talking about??

did you even read the post??

no

obviously not,either that or you missed the point i was so obviously making quill.

ever stop to wonder why it is that you miss the point whereas everyone else who upi obviously consider of inferoir intellect, gets the point??

yeah

If I hadn't read the post how was I able to quote you so effectively?

True, most of what you wrote was the metaphorical nonsense of the RW, but you did raise one concept: guilt.  And you made that admission about selfishness.

I responded.  You should be pleased I didn't dismiss you out of hand.  But, obviously I lost you somewhere.  When you start talking abstractions, you can't go to sleep.

no you didnt respond

you sermonised, and thats when you lost me

looks like elizel isnt the only one upset at the reflection

Eds, perhaps that is because I see the needy here in the UK, and I see, talk to, hear about etc, the needy in other parts of the world, and physically see the different needs of all those people. I have repeatedly said we can help all, but you seem to be implying that I 'don't really think that', and just 'can't bring myself' to say as much. Well I'm telling you, that is wrong.

Smelly inferred his immense selfishness on everyone, and you concurred. That is closed minded isn't it? You can't accept we might truly think differently about nation vs international interests?

Cuchulain wrote:The thing is as I am pointing out people do not apply the same fear process they do to many parts of their lives.
They take the easy option of blame all the time and do not look for solutions. Its easier to blame that it is to find a better way forward, so people take the negative view often then the positive route maybe far harder but is way more rewarding.

and you likewise didge...a politicians answer...

what will YOU tell that victim?

you are a figment of your fear????

or will the left actually TAKE RESPONSIBILITY ????

victorismyhero wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:The thing is as I am pointing out people do not apply the same fear process they do to many parts of their lives.
They take the easy option of blame all the time and do not look for solutions. Its easier to blame that it is to find a better way forward, so people take the negative view often then the positive route maybe far harder but is way more rewarding.

and you likewise didge...a politicians answer...

what will YOU tell that victim?  

you are a figment of your fear????

or will the left actually TAKE RESPONSIBILITY ????

You missed my other post


You forget my family have been victims to terrorism.
Everyone including the victim requires support
Just like we did when we lost family
Your views are fueled by fear for your safety and not that of other, because we all take the risk daily that anything can happen to us. Today somebody could have been run over, do you say to people not to leave their homes incase they maybe run over? No because we combat and overcome fear which we have to live with daily. How many just find it difficult to board a plane for example. What you do is play off fear in the worst form possible and yet never apply this to other aspects of life which you are far more probable to be a victim to.

That is why your whole reasoning is absurd

victorismyhero wrote:

sassy wrote:

I'm not dodging anything, it's not my style.  There is no 'right' answer.  There is no answer that will mean no-one will get hurt, no-one will suffer.  Therefore I weigh up the facts and decide which one will cause the least to suffer.  And then you have to step up to the mark and live with the consequences.

politicians answer....


what will YOU say to that victim????

will YOU go throw rocks at downing street to get him...and the others the 1-2 million they will need? or will you just chuck him on the scrap heap of "benefits" (with ALL that that entails)

you are in fact running away right now by "justifying your position"

No Victor, not a 'politicians answer' in any way.  The facts of the case pure and simple.  What would I say to to victim: I'm sorry, I'm sorry that it was such a bad situation that there was no way to stop someone being hurt.  I will do my damndest to make sure you are looked after, and every child that lived because of the decision we took owes their life to you and therefore you should get everything you need, no matter how much it costs.

Vicar Of Dibley wrote:People are thinking of themselves and their own survival.
The media has done a spiffing job at sensationalizing the reports on the refugees.
Not many people now are falling for it they don't want them here because they're struggling to survive themselves, they don't want to see anyone die or suffer but in this world we are living for our own families and their welfare .
It's just so wrong to put a guilt trip on our people when they can barley survive themselves and with unemployment , no housing, benefit cuts , nhs waiting lists people can just now see how much worse this is going to be for them/us.

People waiting for homes on social housing lists are jealous of immigrants jumping the queue and rightly so , if you have been waiting five + years and then some immigrant family jump you in the queue then that is not just unfair it is a cause for feeling very jealous and can only cause animosity amongst immigrants and British born people .

It's not so bad for pensioners as they are receiving a regular income, but most families are struggling to make ends meet and at the end of the week there is nothing left for little luxuries and why can't working families have luxuries for their hard work. How do you think it makes a family feel when their main wage earner is paying tax and NIC only to have immigrants come in and get everything on a plate and how do you think it makes them feel having to wait for nhs treatment having paid into the system .

British people are not heartless they help anyone in need just look at the charities they give to such as children in need the money raised from that is huge so you see by this that even the poor will give to help those less fortunate, but they also know that times are so hard right now and common sense tells them that we just need to look after our own for a change.

so very true....

support ,,,where????

criminal injuries compensation is fuck all.....

support...??? some one holding your hand and saying "there there"

Victins get what... a few quid if they are lucky (which is perhaps just enough to be beyond the benefit savings cap so they dont get benefits) and when thats gone they might get the honour of being labled scrougers and paid a pittance in benefits...

great...support...lovely......

but my quetsion TO YOU, same as Sassy is ...what will YOU say to that young man.....when he askes WHY???? did YOU do this?

Tell me Victor, when men and sent into war and maimed, should the government apologise to them and make sure they are looked after for ever, if they are killed, are their children looked after?  No they aren't, I am adamant they should be, the responsiblity is theirs.

Eilzel wrote:^Eds

But if you are so open minded why do you refuse to believe people like me, Quill and didge actually care about humanity in a broader sense over our selfishness (not saying we are without selfishness)? Why do you presume anti-white/British racism on us just because we don't think as you do?

have you listened to yourself??

i see your arrogance has not only expanded by exapnded astronomically, if such a thing could bear imagining, i may have to borrow some of walters powers of imagination to take it all in

do you honestly beleive that you are SOOOOOOOOOOOOO experienced and correct and right on everything that anyone who "refuses" to believe you is somehow "closed minded"

i may need to borrow some of walters imagination but you have clearly been double dipping into his supply of Narcissism

Christie wrote:I feel as though I have to give a shout out to the women, now that I just bigged up 3 men lol  its only fair.  Sassy and Eddie, you two also speak your mind and say it how it is with ease and fluent understanding!

Thank you Christie. Rags is also a good poster as are you

I've been a better typist when I had my laptop! My iPad writes words I never type

victorismyhero wrote:support ,,,where????

criminal injuries compensation is fuck all.....

support...??? some one holding your hand and saying "there there"

Victins get what... a few quid if they are lucky (which is perhaps just enough to be beyond the benefit savings cap so they dont get benefits) and when thats gone they might get the honour of being labled scrougers and paid a pittance in benefits...

great...support...lovely......

but my quetsion TO YOU, same as Sassy is ...what will YOU say to that young man.....when he askes WHY???? did YOU do this?

I agree there should be more suppoprt for victims out there but again your reasoning based on fear is so poorly based off certain aspects. Its all down to risk at the end of the day and the chances of being a victim of terrorism are slim to say the least, you are far more likely to die of other daily things that have a far higher risk and yet you play of fear where the risk is actually small. So you tell me Victor, what chances have you of being in an accident with a car? Do you then never get in a car? Call for the ban of all cars?
You see if we use your reasoning nobody would ever leave their own homes through fear. Luckily we combat that fear

Eilzel wrote:Also, why do you assume Quill doesn't give his real opinions or feelings just because doesn't type a certain way? Some people a good writers, others are not. That doesn't qualify or disqualify their view as eithet honest or intelligent.

Because he often doesn't.
He writes for effect.

But at least he doesn't answer with c&p.
God that's a bore.